OMG.. About 300 killed and 700 injured. Do you think Israel still seeking for peace ?

This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: OMG.. About 300 killed and 700 injured. Do you think Israel still seeking for pea

You know what EgoffTib? I’ve sat back and watched you try to trot out your naive moral equivalency arguments throughout this and many threads related to religion. In particular Christian religion. You of course have a great many issues with Christianity. Unless you would like to claim otherwise? You know me, I just “dream up” these whacky ideas of mine! So far off base am I! You are of course the high minded type who tried to “joke” that Christians were baptized in the urine of Christ. All in good humor naturally. So let us explore your deeply considered logic in this thread.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

It is quite unfortunate that the scum are not the only ones the IDF are killing.

Since the scum hide amongst civilians, by design to highlight civilian deaths, your point is what?

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Islam teaches just as much violence as Christianity does. Please remove your blinders and try to look at this objectively.

By all means do explain how either Islam or Christianity “teaches just as much violence” as the other. Simply put it is down to you to explain away the basic “teaching” as you say, that ALL who will not convert must fall to the sword. We/I shall await your learned theological understanding of this basic “teaching of violence” you lecture about.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

The New Testament is only one half of the Bible. Your willingness to ignore the Old Testament is quite telling. Cannot let facts get in the way of your argument, right?

Yes God knows that you don’t want facts to get in the way of your prognostications. So let us look at your own stated understanding of basic facts, which many aside from you have been able to grasp for centuries!

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Ah! So we shall ignore the Old Testament and move on to the New Testament. So it is violence from the NT you want? Ask and you shall receive:

Matthew 10:21 - And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death.

WOW, please tell me you honestly and truly meant that this equates killing all who will not convert to Christinaity! Great grasp of the topic there Egoff.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

John 3:36 - He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

So you need a basic tutorial about the life in the here and now versus the hereafter?

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Mark 16:16 - He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

You mean damned, in the afterlife? Where the virgins await those who put to the sword the infidels?

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Matthew 10:34 - I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword(Jesus said this).

Chuckle. Way to post a relevant quote McFly!Allow me to illustrate precisely the kind of bluster and bait I am talking about with regard to you. From this very thread, which oddly you continue to pontificate in. Go figure!

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

I could care less who is more believable. I do, however, care that we support Israel. Let the idiots blow themselves to pieces, we should have no involvement.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Israel's been working on that by expanding their country over the last 60 years to three times it's original size. I think it is quite hilarious when people then wonder why the Palestinians are upset.

Originally Posted by jallman

Well there's your problem right there...

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

My problem is not taking one side's word for something in warfare?

Originally Posted by jallman

No, you stated yourself that you don't care who is more truthful. That is your problem.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Incorrect. I said that I could "care less who is more BELIEVABLE", because being more believable does not mean one is telling the truth.

Originally Posted by jallman

And what makes one more believable than the other?

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

I suggest you ask that question to someone who finds either of them to be believable, since I do not.

Originally Posted by jallman

And there is your problem right there...you don't have a proper sense of perspective given the past situations with either.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

And there is your problem right there... Claiming that I do not have a "proper" sense of perspective is your opinion. I am fully aware of the events that have unfolded over the past 60 years in that region.

Originally Posted by jallman

I simply don't believe that you do. If you were fully aware, you would have a better sense of perspective when it comes to Hamas. But you don't.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Again, the phrase "better sense of perspective" is indicative of your closed mind on this issue. Both groups have made poor choices and taken countless innocent lives. My solution is to let them deal with their own problems. I have my opinion on the matter and you have yours. It's really that simple.

Originally Posted by jallman

Except the fact that your opinion lacks perspective. It is reminiscent of some 18 or 19 year old puffing up his chest and claiming knowledge on a subject he simply doesn't.

That's no insult, just an observation. I miss the days when people used to think I was a mere boy.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

You have yet to demonstrate why this is true.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Really? More opinion?

Originally Posted by jallman

No...you stated that. It's an observation of facts about you.

Too bad you can't see through your self-imposed blinders.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

You are right, I did state that I trusted neither one. It is your OPINION(stick with me here) that my choice to support neither country is wrong and lacking perspective. You have yet to explain, using facts, why the stance I have chosen is the wrong one.

Originally Posted by jallman

The fact is, your sense of perspective is skewed. That comes directly from your refusal to acknowledge who the more truthful and believable party is. There's no help for someone who has no regard for the truth.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Again, this is more opinion.

Originally Posted by jallman

Opinion arrived at by the fact that you disregard truth.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

No, not opinion. Hamas has a history of underhandedness and lack of integrity. You fail.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

In your opinion, it is Israel. In my opinion it is neither. So now where are we?
Indeed.

Originally Posted by jallman

Then start having a deeper respect for truth and you won't have such a skewed perception of the world.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Yet it is your opinion that I "disregard truth". This is getting amusing now.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Israel has a history of rapid and ruthless expansion. What is your point?

Originally Posted by jallman

No, you stated it yourself. Would you like to backpedal out of that now?

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Israel has a history of rapid and ruthless expansion. What is your point?

Originally Posted by jallman

That has nothing to do with the original point of contention: whether Hamas is hiding weapons in civilian locations. You can't even keep up with the discussion.

Originally Posted by jallman

I'm starting to get the distinct impression I actually am dealing with a teenager here.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

You are. I suggest you check my profile.

Originally Posted by jallman

Then this whole time I was holding you to a much higher standard than I should have been. No worries...you are right on track for your age. I will back off.

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Well I would like you to continue holding me to that standard, I need a good challenge.

Apparently you forgot you “needed a good challenge” here and so you just kept on plowing ahead on the same path, despite your earlier claims.

Re: OMG.. About 300 killed and 700 injured. Do you think Israel still seeking for pea

Originally Posted by ludahai

Israel came into occupation of those lands through a war started by the Arabs. Israel has the legal right to remain in belligerant occupation of those lands until a treaty of peace formally disposes of those lands. The aggression was the Arabs, NOT Israel.

And the Arabs went to war with Israel because it took Arab land. Israel has a right to exist today but going back like you are will not give the occupations and settlements just grounds.

Last edited by Wessexman; 01-20-09 at 05:47 AM.

"It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

Re: OMG.. About 300 killed and 700 injured. Do you think Israel still seeking for pea

Originally Posted by ludahai

The UN has the right to decide by being virtue of the successor of the League of Nations. Remember, the British Mandate was assigned by the League of Nations. Thus, the UN does have a right to have a saw in this matter as it did with territories covered by its own Trusteeship System.

This does not give the UN the right to remove all rights to private property. That is pure socialism you are peddling again.

However, the issue here is STATE sovereignty, NOT individual property rights -regardless of how much you are trying to make this the issue.

No the issue is individual property rights, it is you trying to confuse the issue.

I did NOT say the UN decides right and wrong, but the UN had jurisdiction here as this was part of the League of Nations Mandatory System that the UN, as the successor organization to the League, took responsibility for.

If the UN does not decide right and wrong, and it if it does then it has contradicted itself, then you argument is not irrelevant. None of the above gives the Jews the right to emigrate en masse or steal the lands of the Arabs. Not that I'm suggesting Israel now has no right to exist only that when you claim the Arabs invaded Israel one can keep going and show the original invasion was the Jews before 1948. So saying the occupations are justified by this route and certainly the settlements will not work.

Last edited by Wessexman; 01-20-09 at 05:46 AM.

"It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

Re: OMG.. About 300 killed and 700 injured. Do you think Israel still seeking for pea

Originally Posted by EgoffTib

Precisely, the problem is that you are being dishonest. You are making the case that Christianity should be forgiven for it's massive mistakes which took hundreds of thousands of lives, while stating Islam is a cancer which needs to be removed from our world.

I think those figures for Xtianity are somewhat steep. Even the much talked about Inquisition, aside from often being political, was rivalled in a few years by the French revolutionists. Compared to the last few centuries the religious wars of Christianity and Islam look small indeed.

"It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

Re: OMG.. About 300 killed and 700 injured. Do you think Israel still seeking for pea

Originally Posted by Wessexman

And the Arabs went to war with Israel because it took Arab land. Israel has a right to exist today but going back like you are will not give the occupations and settlements just grounds.

When did Arabs have sovereignty over that land? It has been a VERY LONG time since they did. How can you say Israel took over Arab land when there had been no Arab sovereign over that land for hundreds of years?

Re: OMG.. About 300 killed and 700 injured. Do you think Israel still seeking for pea

Originally Posted by ludahai

When did Arabs have sovereignty over that land? It has been a VERY LONG time since they did. How can you say Israel took over Arab land when there had been no Arab sovereign over that land for hundreds of years?

Most of the land was the private property of the Arabs before 1918.

Don't start the Bolshevism again. The fact the statehood of the land changes doesn't mean that all ancient, traditional rights to private property on it are removed and to say so is pure socialism and against Catholic social teaching.

Please explain how you reconcile your support for socialism here with your Catholicism?

"It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

Re: OMG.. About 300 killed and 700 injured. Do you think Israel still seeking for pea

Originally Posted by Wessexman

This does not give the UN the right to remove all rights to private property. That is pure socialism you are peddling again.

No the issue is individual property rights, it is you trying to confuse the issue.

The issue is state sovereignty, not private property. YOU are the one who is trying to posit that private property is at issue here, but it isn't. It is who is sovereign over the land. Who has sovereign rights?

If the UN does not decide right and wrong, and it if it does then it has contradicted itself, then you argument is not irrelevant. None of the above gives the Jews the right to emigrate en masse or steal the lands of the Arabs. Not that I'm suggesting Israel now has no right to exist only that when you claim the Arabs invaded Israel one can keep going and show the original invasion was the Jews before 1948. So saying the occupations are justified by this route and certainly the settlements will not work.

The UN has jurisdiction in this specific case because the territory was a League of Nations mandate following World War I. It was a part of the Ottomom Empire, which was on the losing side of the war. It was placed in a Mandate to be administered by Britain. The UN inherited the Mandate system and thus has the jurisdiction to make a determination about the future of the territory.

Re: OMG.. About 300 killed and 700 injured. Do you think Israel still seeking for pea

Originally Posted by ludahai

The issue is state sovereignty, not private property. YOU are the one who is trying to posit that private property is at issue here, but it isn't. It is who is sovereign over the land. Who has sovereign rights?

No the issue is whether the Jews aggressed against the people of Palestine by stealing their land and emigrating en masse and this has nothing to do with sovereignty. This is only being brought up because you can't contruct a proper argument and keep making dodgy historical detours while blurring the whole picture and of course putting forward completely socialist viewpoints. If you want to talk about Arab aggression then the prior Jewish aggression and land-theft is certainly relevant and has little to do with statehood.

Or we could just keep to the here and now and then condemn the Israeli occupation and settlement and the Hamas terrorist attacks.

The UN has jurisdiction in this specific case because the territory was a League of Nations mandate following World War I. It was a part of the Ottomom Empire, which was on the losing side of the war. It was placed in a Mandate to be administered by Britain. The UN inherited the Mandate system and thus has the jurisdiction to make a determination about the future of the territory.

Aside from the fact that makes absolutely no sense it wouldn't change the fact that the original emigration and land theft was an aggression.

Last edited by Wessexman; 01-20-09 at 06:14 AM.

"It is written in the eternal constitution that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." - Edmund Burke

Re: OMG.. About 300 killed and 700 injured. Do you think Israel still seeking for pea

Originally Posted by Wessexman

No the issue is whether the Jews aggressed against the people of Palestine by stealing their land and emigrating en masse and this has nothing to do with sovereignty. This is only being brought up because you can't contruct a proper argument and keep making dodgy historical detours while blurring the whole picture and of course putting forward completely socialist viewpoints. If you want to talk about Arab aggression then the prior Jewish aggression and land-theft is certainly relevant and has little to do with statehood.

Or we could just keep to the here and now and then condemn the Israeli occupation and settlement and the Hamas terrorist attacks.

Aside from the fact that makes absolutely no sense it wouldn't change the fact that the original emigration and land theft was an aggression.

Actually, the issue is jurisdiction. The British Mandate allowed Great Britain to be the administrators over Palestine. From the beginning the Palestinian Mandate was to be divided into three areas; Jordan, Israel, and an Arab-Palestine. Individual rights were less relevant than the plan to divide the area. One the UN was created, the Mandate, still governed by Great Britain, was now overseen by the UN, until the British handed over administration to them in 1947.

I understand that some do not like this, but that is irrelevant. It is what occurred. It was not aggression. It was authorized and mandated by the UN. Again, whether you like it or not is irrelevant. The only aggression that occurred was Arab aggression, going against the authorized decision of the UN. And, once again, it is irrelevant whether they liked it or not.

The problem with this entire line of debate is that the side that blames the Partition is just playing the victim. The Partition happened. It's not changing. Get over it. What is the current solution? Complaining about the partition is far from it.

This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

Originally Posted by Navy Pride

You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.

Originally Posted by Wessexman

See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .

Originally Posted by CriticalThought

Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.

Originally Posted by ernst barkmann

It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"